Posted: 12/29/2025 9:13:57 PM EDT
[Last Edit: kc-coyote][Edited]
|
UFO secret files, drone swarms and nuclear-linked sightings stun experts in 2025 https://www.foxnews.com/us/ufo-secret-files-drone-swarms-nuclear-linked-sightings-stun-experts-2025 It was the year of the UFO in 2025. From new-age documentaries to decades-old mysterious reports coming to light, both experts and civilians have been baffled by a slew of new information regarding otherworldly objects appearing over the country’s skies. Here is a look at the most compelling, out-of-this-world UFO headlines from 2025, as questions continue to swirl regarding the validity of such claims and whether we are truly alone in the universe. Decades-old images reveal new UFO clues in strange bursts over nuclear test sites Earlier this year, scientists at California’s Palomar Observatory discovered several instances of transient, star-like flashes in photographs taken over 70 years ago that may hold the key to answers regarding instances of unidentified aerial phenomena (UAPs) – or UFOs – appearing near nuclear testing sites, according to a research paper published in Nature’s Scientific Reports on Oct. 20, 2025. The images originated from digitized astronomical plates – pieces of glass that capture images of the night sky – compiled by the observatory from 1949 to 1957, while also predating the launch of the first artificial satellite in October 1957. "We speculate that some transients could potentially be UAP in Earth orbit that, if descending into the atmosphere, might provide the stimulus for some UAP sightings," the paper states. While many of the objects were determined by scientists to be errors or markings on the physical plates, thousands of other sightings reportedly correspond with various documented sightings of UFOs appearing near nuclear testing sites. In one instance, bright objects were spotted in the night sky within the same two weeks when witnesses reported numerous UAPs above Washington, D.C., from July 19 to July 27, 1952, according to the report. The final documented sighting within the timeframe was over a nuclear testing site on March 17, 1956, just one day after the "Joe 21" test conducted by the Soviet Union, according to the New York Post. Researchers also subsequently observed transients hovering on at least 124 above-ground nuclear tests at sites that were active from 1951 until the launch of Sputnik in 1957. However, further research reportedly led them to the conclusion that the phenomenon was the result of "high energy particles" present within the atmosphere, due to the nuclear testing materials. ***It's a long article. Worth reading, but does regurgitate much of what folks in this forum already know.*** |
Joined:
May 2024
Posts:
2733
EE: 0% (0)
USA
|
The only thing I have an issue with Canada's Maid program is that they are trying to push it on kids now, as well as people who do not want it but cannot afford treatment leaving assisted suicide as their only option. Outside of that, the people that I would want to use it, appear to be using it. Leftists are solving my problems with leftists.... |
|
Originally Posted By kc-coyote: "We speculate that some transients could potentially be UAP in Earth orbit that, if descending into the atmosphere, might provide the stimulus for some UAP sightings," the paper states. While many of the objects were determined by scientists to be errors or markings on the physical plates, thousands of other sightings reportedly correspond with various documented sightings of UFOs appearing near nuclear testing sites. It's strange how they they write down a rapid guess to describe these phenomenon, especially after Roswell. Everything just natural, no matter how strange or out of place it is. |
The person who complains most, and is the most critical of others has the most to hide.
All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.
All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.
|
Originally Posted By brass: It's strange how they they write down a rapid guess to describe these phenomenon, especially after Roswell. Everything just natural, no matter how strange or out of place it is. Well...OK. You're not wrong. What they're choosing to use as a weapon is semantics. There is literally nothing "supernatural." Everything that exists, no matter how outside your belief/reality/science, is still "natural." Anything beyond that, i.e. beyond "natural," by definition, cannot exist. It either exists in our reality, or it doesn't. The word you're looking for is either "supernormal," or "paranormal." That implies something that can exist outside of a "normal" person's reality. Which, again, leads us to the question...what is "normal?" It's word salad. The people parroting it have a room-temperature IQ, but they're making a solid financial living telling you bullshit on the evening news and being hot as an anchor or weather girl, or on a website where they get paid by the word. They don't even understand they're part of the problem. Not even close. What's the alternative? Insular, incestuous websites and message boards like this, where (most) everyone is a believer already, and the same topics get discussed ad nauseum. They've (whoever/whatever/Illuminati/Lizzid People/pick your poison) have already won. Not because they've fooled us...just the other 95% of the population. 
|
Pope Gregorius Billingsgate Callipygian Quimtickler, First of His Name
Chakravartin of the Feculent Multiversal Litterbox
Protodeacon of the Iniquitous
Gurkhan of the Illimitable Feline Hordes
Chakravartin of the Feculent Multiversal Litterbox
Protodeacon of the Iniquitous
Gurkhan of the Illimitable Feline Hordes
|
Originally Posted By Kagetora: Well...OK. You're not wrong. What they're choosing to use as a weapon is semantics. There is literally nothing "supernatural." Everything that exists, no matter how outside your belief/reality/science, is still "natural." Anything beyond that, i.e. beyond "natural," by definition, cannot exist. It either exists in our reality, or it doesn't. The word you're looking for is either "supernormal," or "paranormal." That implies something that can exist outside of a "normal" person's reality. Which, again, leads us to the question...what is "normal?" It's word salad. The people parroting it have a room-temperature IQ, but they're making a solid financial living telling you bullshit on the evening news and being hot as an anchor or weather girl, or on a website where they get paid by the word. They don't even understand they're part of the problem. Not even close. What's the alternative? Insular, incestuous websites and message boards like this, where (most) everyone is a believer already, and the same topics get discussed ad nauseum. They've (whoever/whatever/Illuminati/Lizzid People/pick your poison) have already won. Not because they've fooled us...just the other 95% of the population. I think the word paranormal still has a stigma that makes much of what could be applied scientifically, seem more like science fiction. For UFO's they changed the name to UAP and it seems to have worked along with some credible individuals such as David Grusch coming forward. Unfortunately we don't have a David Grusch type of gov official when it comes to things like Bigfoot. Maybe with more disclosure of UFO/UAP we will be able to peel the onion more 'officially' with topics such as bigfoot. |
|
Originally Posted By kc-coyote: I think the word paranormal still has a stigma that makes much of what could be applied scientifically, seem more like science fiction. For UFO's they changed the name to UAP and it seems to have worked along with some credible individuals such as David Grusch coming forward. Unfortunately we don't have a David Grusch type of gov official when it comes to things like Bigfoot. Maybe with more disclosure of UFO/UAP we will be able to peel the onion more 'officially' with topics such as bigfoot. Sooo....what word would you choose to replace "supranormal" or "paranormal?" Again, we're talking semantics and word salad. I think the point is to create stigma around certain words, like paranormal, supernatural, UFO, etc. The instant you pick another word to replace that, "they," whomever they are, start trying to discredit/stigmatize it. I think it's just a matter of time until UAP goes the way of UFO. I hope I'm wrong, but I think "they" have a metric shit-ton more resources than we do, i.e. media (published, film, podcast, whatever), political figures, money, and the rest of it. There's a chance. A tiny one. That if the people who want to know the truth can capitalize on the current momentum, the truth might emerge. That, of course, assumes that any of what we chat about here is actually true. It might not be. Let me repeat that, louder. IT MIGHT NOT BE. Or perhaps only selected nuggets of it hold any truth. It also assumes that "they" aren't manipulating this current disclosure movement in their efforts to contain and discredit it, i.e. to turn UAP's into UFO's, the realm of crackpots and conspiracy theorists. You can watch this happening in real time in a bunch of sciences...or, maybe you can't, because maybe the outlier theories are actually from crackpots and conspiracy theorists. I certainly don't have the truth, or know anything that would reveal it. All I know is that some of the sciences I've dealt in seem to have a heavy selection bias towards the status quo. Why? Because it's right? Or because it's covering up the truth? |
Pope Gregorius Billingsgate Callipygian Quimtickler, First of His Name
Chakravartin of the Feculent Multiversal Litterbox
Protodeacon of the Iniquitous
Gurkhan of the Illimitable Feline Hordes
Chakravartin of the Feculent Multiversal Litterbox
Protodeacon of the Iniquitous
Gurkhan of the Illimitable Feline Hordes
|
Originally Posted By Kagetora: Sooo....what word would you choose to replace "supranormal" or "paranormal?" Again, we're talking semantics and word salad. I think the point is to create stigma around certain words, like paranormal, supernatural, UFO, etc. The instant you pick another word to replace that, "they," whomever they are, start trying to discredit/stigmatize it. I think it's just a matter of time until UAP goes the way of UFO. I hope I'm wrong, but I think "they" have a metric shit-ton more resources than we do, i.e. media (published, film, podcast, whatever), political figures, money, and the rest of it. There's a chance. A tiny one. That if the people who want to know the truth can capitalize on the current momentum, the truth might emerge. That, of course, assumes that any of what we chat about here is actually true. It might not be. Let me repeat that, louder. IT MIGHT NOT BE. Or perhaps only selected nuggets of it hold any truth. It also assumes that "they" aren't manipulating this current disclosure movement in their efforts to contain and discredit it, i.e. to turn UAP's into UFO's, the realm of crackpots and conspiracy theorists. You can watch this happening in real time in a bunch of sciences...or, maybe you can't, because maybe the outlier theories are actually from crackpots and conspiracy theorists. I certainly don't have the truth, or know anything that would reveal it. All I know is that some of the sciences I've dealt in seem to have a heavy selection bias towards the status quo. Why? Because it's right? Or because it's covering up the truth? Originally Posted By Kagetora: Originally Posted By kc-coyote: I think the word paranormal still has a stigma that makes much of what could be applied scientifically, seem more like science fiction. For UFO's they changed the name to UAP and it seems to have worked along with some credible individuals such as David Grusch coming forward. Unfortunately we don't have a David Grusch type of gov official when it comes to things like Bigfoot. Maybe with more disclosure of UFO/UAP we will be able to peel the onion more 'officially' with topics such as bigfoot. Sooo....what word would you choose to replace "supranormal" or "paranormal?" Again, we're talking semantics and word salad. I think the point is to create stigma around certain words, like paranormal, supernatural, UFO, etc. The instant you pick another word to replace that, "they," whomever they are, start trying to discredit/stigmatize it. I think it's just a matter of time until UAP goes the way of UFO. I hope I'm wrong, but I think "they" have a metric shit-ton more resources than we do, i.e. media (published, film, podcast, whatever), political figures, money, and the rest of it. There's a chance. A tiny one. That if the people who want to know the truth can capitalize on the current momentum, the truth might emerge. That, of course, assumes that any of what we chat about here is actually true. It might not be. Let me repeat that, louder. IT MIGHT NOT BE. Or perhaps only selected nuggets of it hold any truth. It also assumes that "they" aren't manipulating this current disclosure movement in their efforts to contain and discredit it, i.e. to turn UAP's into UFO's, the realm of crackpots and conspiracy theorists. You can watch this happening in real time in a bunch of sciences...or, maybe you can't, because maybe the outlier theories are actually from crackpots and conspiracy theorists. I certainly don't have the truth, or know anything that would reveal it. All I know is that some of the sciences I've dealt in seem to have a heavy selection bias towards the status quo. Why? Because it's right? Or because it's covering up the truth? I agree with your statement that everything is natural, like 100% natural milk, chemical free! Even though milk is all different chemicals in a homogeneous mixture. Ricin is 100% natural, that doesn't mean it's good for you. Anyway, back on topic, I think "supernatural" and "Paranormal" got a toxic tint to them from the 70s with 'crystal pyramid power" and wear this bracelet to cure cancer and extend life and similar dubious claims being labeled with either paranormal or supernatural, essentially removing effective vocabulary for people like us freaks have a way to describe the sort of "baskets" of knowledge found. It was obviously 100% intentional, but back in the 70s, TV stations turned on at 5 am and shut down at 11 pm while the sidewalks were rolled up around 8pm and put back out around 10 am. I know it wasn't like that in the bigger cities, but in places with populations under 50k, life was only a daytime thing and to learn something you'd get books which were published 3 years prior regarding things found and details of something 5 years prior to that, so looking at information a minimum of 8 years old and extremely well "controlled" to make sure people didn't start thinking. TV had 3 channels (2 if you didn't count the one one of us kids had to hold onto the antenna and face NNW for reception) and all information was extremely well controlled/censored. The laugh track did more for controlling what the population thought as much as plot points and side discussions in TV shows. They applied it by having a laugh track any time somebody mentioned flying saucers or Nixon and the like, so since the people were laughing and viewers were under the assumption that it was a live broadcast, they unintentionally had their brain mock information of that sort in the future. With enough reinforcement they controlled everything from people watching M*A*S*H and Cheers, with one re-defining Korean war and the other defining what the population thought about current events. Speaking of which, why was there never a bunch of movies about the Korean war? M*A*S*H was it, while WW II and Vietnam were fodder for hundreds of movies, Korean war just didn't get coverage, was that because it was wrongthink removed? This started to crack a little bit in the 80s with 300 baud BBS boards (I only had 110 baud acoustic on my Atari 800 then 1200XL) allowing discussions similar to what we have here but with far, far less information (due to BBS speed being around my typing speed) and a whole lot of forwarded Usenet details right when it was being created. Fidonet patched Usenet into the BBS and that's how we had internet in the late 80s. Then the 90s showed up with 9600 baud and real information that was recent flew around extremely fast allowing people to research topics like this with less censoring, not no censorship, but reduced. Then we came to the age of forums and it still took another 20 years so that we could discuss things like this openly. However, the pool was made toxic from TV shows in the 70s to even now. We are forced to sit in the corner of this forum to discuss things which have been found and proven scientifically yet the average person will call it bullshit so we still aren't in an age where real information flows freely, there is a lot of poisoning the well and censorship /shunning going along, just look at many topics in this forum right after a thread hits active topics in late evenings to overnight.  --ETA: I fear that by the time we know the true details about this, it will be irrelevant since we will be in societal collapse when it's finally released with the aliens in our front yards. Maybe the .gov lizzid people will finally take off their masks once assimilation is complete and we will be harvested or something. |
The person who complains most, and is the most critical of others has the most to hide.
All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.
All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.